Agenda and draft minutes

To see nominations for the election for the position of Chair.

A nomination was made and seconded for Councillor Bithell to Chair the meeting.

RESOLVED – That Councillor Bithell be elected as Chair for the meeting.

To consider any appeals in accordance with Procedure Rule 15.2 of the Access to Information Rules (in the event of an Appeal the press and public will be excluded)

(*In accordance with Procedure Rule 15.2, written notice of an appeal must be received by the Head of Governance Services at least 24 hours before the meeting)

There were no appeals.

1  To highlight reports or appendices which officers have identified as containing exempt information, and where officers consider that the public interest in maintaining the exemption outweighs the public interest in disclosing the information, for the reasons outlined in the report.

2  To consider whether or not to accept the officers recommendation in respect of the above information.

3  If so, to formally pass the following resolution:-

  RESOLVED – That the press and public be excluded from the meeting during consideration of the following parts of the agenda designated as containing exempt information on the grounds that it is likely, in view of the nature of the business to be transacted or the nature of the proceedings, that if members of the press and public were present there would be disclosure to them of exempt information, as follows:-

There was no exempt information on the agenda.

There were no late items.

To disclose or draw attention to any interests in accordance with Leeds City Council’s ‘Councillor Code of Conduct’.

There were no declarations.

Apologies for absence were submitted on behalf of Councillors K Brooks and C Campbell.

To confirm as a correct record, the minutes of the meeting held on 11 April 2024.

RESOLVED – That the minutes of the meeting.

To receive and consider the report of the Chief Planning Officer regarding applications for the demolition of adjoining wings and erection of replacement buildings of between 4 and 13 storeys to create purpose-built student accommodation; Internal and external alterations to listed building including partial reinstatement of historic floor plan, revealment of side elevations, replacement of windows and replacement of stone steps to front entrance to facilitate level access. Hard and soft landscaping works.

The report of the Chief Planning Officer presented an application for the demolition of adjoining wings and erection of replacement buildings of between 4 and 13 storeys to create purpose-built student accommodation; internal and external alterations to listed building including partial reinstatement of historic floor plan, revealment of side elevations, replacement of windows and replacement of stone steps to front entrance to facilitate level access.  Hard and soft landscaping works at Springfield House, Hyde Street, Woodhouse, Leeds.

Members visited the site prior to the meeting and site plans and photographs were displayed and referred to throughout the discussion of the application.

Further issues highlighted in relation to the application included the following:

·  There had been in-depth pre-application work that had involved design and conservation officers.

·  There was an objection from Historic England.  The site fell within the Woodhouse/Clarendon Road conservation area.  The building was Grade 2 listed and there were Grade 2 listed buildings and a Grade 2* listed building elsewhere within the university campus.

·  Springfield House was originally constructed as a residential villa and was listed in the 1960s.  It was converted into office use in the 1980s when the wings were added to the building.

·  Plans showing the layout of the existing wings to the building and the proposed wings were displayed.  The new proposals would cover a similar footprint with four and 5 storey blocks to the south west of the site and 10, 11 and 13 storeys to the north east.

·  Greenspace to the south east of the site would be retained.

·  Springfield House would remain at the heart of the site with the historic front door to be used as the main entrance.  There would be glazed links to the new wings.

·  Servicing for the building would be done from Clarendon Way and Seminary Street using existing accesses.

·  The listed building would be more clearly articulated with the new proposals.

·  Floor plans were displayed.  Amenity, bin storage and cycle storage would be at ground floor with further amenity at first floor level  There would be cluster flats and studio flats which would provide 343 bedspace and these would meet emerging space standards.

·  There would be photovoltaic panels on the roof.

·  Trees to the front of the building would be retained and the area to the south would have seating and planting.  There would be courtyard areas to the rear.  Materials for use in landscaping and plants for soft landscaping were displayed.

·  Elevation drawings were displayed.  Initial proposals had seen a reduction in the height of the proposed blocks at the south west which was considered more sensitive to the conservation area.  The different kinds of materials and details were also displayed.

·  View of the how the proposals would appear from surrounding areas were displayed.

·  There were outstanding highways issues to resolve.  These included pedestrian connections to the university due to the lack of dropped kerbs and the impact on disabled access.  The applicant was in discussions with the University and it was proposed to resolve  ...  view the full minutes text for item 94.

To receive and consider the attached report of the Chief Planning Officer regarding a pre-application presentation for a purpose built student accommodation development including a mixed offer of cluster and studio units, totalling c.717 units and associated residential amenity spaces.

The report of the Chief Planning Officer informed Members of a pre-application presentation regarding proposals for a purpose built student accommodation development including a mixed offer of cluster and studio units totalling c717 units and associated amenity spaces at Blenheim House, Duncombe Street, Leeds.

Site plans and photographs were displayed and referred to throughout the presentation.  Members had visited the site prior to the meeting.

The applicant’s representatives gave the Panel a presentation.  The following was highlighted:

·  The proposals were still at the early design stage.  The wider setting of the area had been taken into account with regards to listed buildings, conservation area and the local Neighbourhood Forum.

·  Proximity to the universities and safe walking routes.

·  There had been detailed dialogue with Planning Officers during the development of the proposals.

·  There would be amenity provision in excess of guidance at ground floor level.

·  The main entrance would be set back from the street and all access would be security controlled and have CCTV.

·  Details of the upper floor accommodation and examples of typical room layouts.

·  Rooms would have floor to ceiling windows to maximise daylight.

·  Analysis undertaken had shown that there would be no impact to key views from the site.

·  Design and materials – further design work had been undertaken and inspiration was taken from historic buildings and other developments in the area.

·  There would be green roofs and roof terraces.  The development would use air source heat pumps and have photovoltaic panels.

·  There would be an are of public realm on Marlborough Street which would provide opportunities for social interaction.  There would be softer landscaping on Duncombe Street with opportunities for a pocket park and formal play area.  There would also be soft and hard landscaping in an external courtyard to the building.

·  Views from the approaches to the site were displayed.

·  The proposals would provide a sustainable, high quality scheme with enhanced landscaping in a gateway position.

In response to questions and comments from the Panel, discussion included the following:

·  Concerns regarding the loss of existing trees.  It was confirmed that 15 of the 19 trees on the site would be removed.  There would be mitigation planting in the courtyard and an enhanced public realm.

·  The current building on site was not suitable for re-use.  The proposed footprint for the new building would enable the public realm improvements and there were other technical considerations including the positioning of sewerage pipes.

·  The proposed new building would be set back further from Duncombe Street and closer to the A58.  This would enable further space for public realm works.

·  The proposed building would improve surveillance in the area.

·  The proposals were at an early design stage and the relation of the development to nearby residential properties was explained with regards to levels and how the building would be stepped back.

·  The new public realm space would include areas to the Duncombe Street side.  This would be achieved by having the building closer to the A58.

·  The building would be  ...  view the full minutes text for item 95.

To receive and consider the report of the Chief Planing Officer regarding a pre-application presentation for the creation of a multi-storey residential development with ground floor commercial uses (Class E), internal and external amenity spaces, integral cycle storage and accessible car parking provision at Wellington Road and Armley Road, Leeds.

The report of the Chief Planning Officer informed Members of a pre-application presentation regarding proposals for a multi-storey residential development with ground floor commercial uses (Class E), internal and external amenity spaces, integral cycle storage and accessible car parking provision at a site at Wellington Road and Armley Road, Leeds.

Site plans and photographs were displayed and referred to throughout the presentation.  Members had visited the site prior to the meeting.

The applicant’s representatives gave the Panel a presentation.  The following was highlighted:

·  The proposals would create a new sustainable urban community.

·  The proposals were for a 325 unit Build to Rent model with high quality amenities and on site management.

·  This would be a car free development with an emphasis on the safety of pedestrians and cyclists.

·  Green spaces would be delivered for residents and the public.

·  The site was less than a mile from the City Station and was part of a wider area of growth and regeneration.

·  There had been previous outline consent for the site and the new proposals offered a more sustainable development with more green space.  There would be a plaza and courtyards as well as commercial spaces.

·  Floor Plans were displayed.  There would be plant, bin storage and cycle storage at ground floor as well as the three commercial units.

·  There would be large provision of 3 bedroom units.

·  Materials – these would be primarily red brick to reflect the heritage character of the area.

·  Façade treatments – there would be some balconies and apartments would have floor to ceiling windows.

·  CGI images of the proposed buildings and open spaces were displayed.

In response to questions and comments from Members, the following was discussed:

·  There would be thoroughfare for pedestrians. 

·  The commercial properties would be small but suitable for uses such as convenience stores or cafes.

·  There would be further discussion with transport operators with regards to bus provision.

·  There was six schools within one mile distance of the site.

·  There would be provision of roof terraces.

·  The site was currently unkempt with self seeded trees.  There would be some tree loss at the site, but there would be significant planting.

·  Potential use of the commercial units for health provision.

·  Some concerns regarding pedestrian accessibility and public transport access.

·  The need for security gate features on children’s play areas.

·  In response to questions outlined in the report, the following was discussed:

o  Members considered that the proposed use of the site for residential with ground floor commercial uses was appropriate im principle.

o  Members supported the emerging scale and layout of the development.

o  Members supported the emerging landscaping of the site.

o  With regard to the proposed approach to car parking, there was some support for a car free development but some concern regarding the lack of electric charging points.  It was felt that further information on bus services and pedestrian accessibility was required.

RESOLVED – That the report and presentation be noted.

Thursday, 13 June at 1.30 p.m.